Fragments

*** Andrew Adler is the Jewish owner and editor of The Atlanta Jewish Times. Early this month he published a column where he wrote that to ensure its continued existence Israel should consider assassinating Barack Obama. To murder Obama is not his first choice. His first two options for protecting the State of Israel would be preemptive strikes against Hezbollah and Hamas, and the destruction of Iran‘s nuclear facilities. The third strike however would be to give the go-ahead for U.S.-based Mossad agents to take out a U.S. president deemed unfriendly to Israel—Barack Hussein Obama.

Mr. Adler adds: “Don‘t you think that this almost unfathomable idea has been discussed in Israel‘s most inner circles?”

I would ask Mr. Adler: “Don‘t you think this could be seen as a Jew contributing to antiSemitism?” The reaction by Jewish media was fast and furious, to coin a term. Adler is stricken with shame, guilt, and fear. He has stepped down as editor of The Atlanta Jewish Times and is looking for a buyer. Jews everywhere (almost?) are glad to see him go.

*** One sunny noonday about fifteen years ago when we were living in Visalia, California, Russ Granata and Carlo Mattogno stopped by the house to say hello. They were passing by, so to speak, returning to Los Angeles from a trip to Sacramento or other places north. I was in our garage working at the computer when my wife ushered them in. I had met Russ a number of times, he was in the group run by David McCalden in Los Angeles and we each attended David‘s monthly get-togethers. But seeing Carlo there in my garage was a real surprise.

There wasn‘t room for me in Russ‘s car so I got in mine and led them to a bakery/coffee shop downtown on Main Street where we sat at a small round table to talk. Russ and Carlo communicated in Italian, but I had no Italian. Carlo did not speak English. What to do? Turned out that Carlo and I could both do Spanish and that‘s what we did for the next hour or two.

I do not recall a single thing that was said during the time we sat there talking and laughing. It was just chat. What I do remember was what good company Mattogno was, how amused we each were with the other. And I remember that when we parted and Russ‘s car pulled out from the curbing onto Main Street to head South, Mattogno turned in his seat to look out the back window for me. I was standing there on the sidewalk watching them go. When Mattogno found me he laughed and gave me a thumbs-up. That‘s the moment that has remained most clearly in the memory.

*** Paul Nash writes: “Your comments a couple months ago about trying to get Finkelstein to respond about his parents‘ awareness of gas chambers while prisoners reminded me that I‘ve known and spoken at length with a number of people who were at Auschwitz and Dachau and none ever mentioned the subject [of gas chambers – Ed.]. One was my mother‘s half-brother who was a teen-age POW there (captured Polish cavalryman) and we talked about his time in both camps when he came to the US while I was home on leave from the AF in the early Fifties.

“About a year later I was back in New York and met a young Jewish girl—Gertie—who had moved into my mother‘s small apartment building with some relatives. She told me she had been at a factory in one of the Auschwitz camps of {for?} four years, from age 12 to 16, and described her experiences there—not too bad— with a group of girls like herself, but there was no mention of gas chambers. Surely if such a terrifying possibility had existed it would have been all over the grapevine at the prison camp.

“I can understand why Finkelstein doesn‘t want to be seen cooperating with you publicly. He‘s barely hanging on by his teeth as it is. He saw the character assassination that Chomsky got beat up with when he defended Faurisson years ago and knows he would lose whatever clout he has left in the Jewish community if he appeared to be supporting holocaust denial too. You ought to leave Jews like him alone. They‘re really on our team but they can‘t say so out loud.”

*** In the old days, back in the 1990s, CODOH could run quarter-page and even full-page revisionist texts in campus newspapers so long as I had the funds. Nowadays, after 15 years of focused and significantly successful efforts by the ADL, Hillel and the rest of that class of perps, the placement by CODOH of such revisionist texts has become rather impossible. Nevertheless, with the Internet, three and four years ago we were able to turn to placing small ads and links in the online editions of campus newspapers. These small, revisionist ads and links could be found by anyone in the world who has a computer and an interest I the subject, not just those on the specific campus where the newspaper was being published.

Of course the usual perps, again, brought in their big guns and have significantly limited, though not entirely closed down, even this kind of revisionist presence on the American university campus. Still, the life of a technologically advanced culture being what it is, CODOH has a way to get to students and faculty and university administrations on the American campus nationwide. The concept is very simple. Choose a university where we want to have a presence, build an email list for that campus of students, faculty and administration, and send these folk our materials directly.

There are programs available to university webmasters to block these sends, but there are programs available to us to unblock them, to go around them, under and over them. That‘s what we are doing. We‘ve put a lot of hours into developing new email lists for student organizations at major universities around the country. These last weeks we have focused, though not exclusively, on those campuses that provide full access to the thousands of videos of survivor testimony collected by Steven Spielberg‘s The Shoah Foundation, which is headquartered at USC in Los Angeles. Not difficult, but it is substantially time consuming.

The idea is to be a steady presence, a provocation, on campus via the internet throughout the year, to never let up, to go around, to go over or under every wall put up against us. In short, if we cannot get into the university in one way, we will get there in another. Following is an outline of one sample of the sends we are emailing to hundreds of student organizations at one campus after another. We will work with one text after another until we find one that is particularly productive. Being productive means college students subscribe to SR online, join our FaceBook pages, and take the story to their professors, their campus newspaper and on out to the community in which their university is situated. Following is one example of the mailings we are doing. It was sent to student organizations and faculty at six universities. In the send itself there is a brief descriptive introduction to each text. The send is headlined:

Following the above, the student finds a brief introduction to CODOH, a link to sign up for Smith’s Report and news updates, and direct contact numbers for me. Most of these materials will be old hat to you, most were printed in Smith’s Report. But it will be the first revisionist information that the student has ever directly received. Ever.

*** Richard Widmann has some bad news. He writes:

“The team here at Inconvenient History has just learned that our print-on-demand publisher, Lulu, will no longer print or distribute our Annual editions. The ‘Questionable Content Team‘ at Lulu has informed us that our content and in fact all revisionist writing is ‘illegal and anti-constitutional‘ in France and Germany — two of their markets.

“While it is likely that some apprentice book burner filed a complaint with Lulu, it is Lulu‘s shame that they refused to stand up for free speech. Today it is not necessary to set bonfires to burn books.

“This was highly effective in the early days of the printing press and the years prior when manuscripts were written by hand. With our technological advances, however, we have rushed madly in a direction which empowers the modern day book burners to silence ideas with which they do not agree.

“In my editorial from the first issue of Inconvenient History, I noted that Inconvenient History is not for the squeamish and may not leave you feeling very comfortable — but I had hoped that it might cause a few to think for themselves.

“When we silence opinions with which we don‘t agree, we have chosen dictatorship over freedom. We have sided with the crowd and against the individual. Popular speech never needs protection.

“The team at Inconvenient History is currently in the process of making our annuals available to you once again. As soon as the arrangements are finalized, you shall be among the first to know.”

[The last five orders for Inconvenient History, Vol. II received here are waiting. If the printing issue is not settled in the next ten days, I’ll refund those payments.—Bradley]

*** During the calendar year 2011, 36,638 people logged onto Inconvenient History: A Quarterly Journal for Free Historical Inquiry. They opened 121,826 pages of text. The most popular articles were: “A Chronicle of Holocaust Revisionism, Part 1: Early Doubts (1945-1949)”[1] , by Thomas Kues. “Jewish Conspiracy Theory, the Eichmann Testimony and the Holocaust: Deborah Lipstadt’s Contribution to Holocaust Revisionism”, by Paul Grubach. “Adolf Hitler’s Armed Forces: A Triumph for Diversity?” by Veronica Clark. “Halfway between Reality and Myth: Hitler's Ten-Year War on the Jews Reconsidered”, by Thomas Kues. “Churchill, International Jews and the Holocaust: A Revisionist Analysis”, by Paul Grubach. “Chil Rajchman’s Treblinka Memoirs”, by Thomas Kues.

*** Ten years ago in SR 89 I reprinted a worried announcement from the ADL about how Holocaust “denial” was growing in the Middle East. It announced a new feature on its Website. It was called “Holocaust Denial in the Middle East: The Latest Anti-Israel, Anti-Semitic Propaganda Theme.”

“In recent years Western Holocaust deniers have turned to the Arab world for help when facing prosecution in various countries for illegal activities. Wolfgang Fröhlich and Jürgen Graf have sought refuge in Iran, and Roger Garaudy was hailed as a hero throughout the Middle East when he faced persecution by the French government for inciting racial hatred. Other Western Holocaust deniers have also sought entry to the Middle East, including Mark Weber and Bradley Smith.”

I wrote:

“If it is ‘anti-Semitic’ to encourage intellectual freedom with regard to the gas chambers stories in America and Western Europe, and Israel, then I have to agree that it must be anti-Semitic to encourage intellectual freedom among Arabs to do the same. The ADL‘s new feature presentation on ‘Holocaust Denial in the Middle East‘ causes me to recall a line of questioning that was put to me recently by a journalism professor who is doing a book that is more or less focused on the Campus Project. He noted a number of stories I have reported on in this newsletter over the last couple years, including:

“February 2000 Just to keep the people at the ADL Campus Affairs office on their feet, I now announce that the Nation of Islam Student Association (NOISA) has offered to distribute The Revisionist.”

“March 2000 Representatives of NOISA took copies (from four black colleges). This pleases me no end. I hope not for the wrong reason."

“June 2000 Audrey said she would try to network with an Arab organization. The number of English-speaking Arabs visiting CODOHWeb from all over the world is going to increase. How can that be bad?”

“August 2000 (In Supporting Student Editors, Audrey writes): ‘… a husband and wife team has amassed hundreds of email addresses (including) Arab newspapers.’"

“April 2001 Muslim students were preparing to present an ‘Anti-Zionist Week‘ at UCSD, and thought I could be a speaker… I was happy to oblige."

“June 2001 After quoting from UCLA's Muslim News magazine, where they write negatively about the Holocaust [and] the colonization of Palestine, you close with ‘One more welcome sign that Muslims in America, as well as in the Arab world, are beginning to address some of the issues that revisionists address.‘"

“The professor asked: ‘Is this CODOH's aim—to tie in closer with Arabs and Muslims challenging the legitimacy of Zionism, Israel and the Holocaust?‘

“A reasonable question, but one with implications that are misleading. The first thing to say is that CODOH has no political agenda, in the usual sense of that phrase. The second is that the pursuit of intellectual freedom is, indeed, a political agenda. What distinguishes it from the run-of-the-mill political agenda is that the agenda for intellectual freedom offers to those who are against such an agenda exactly what it proposes for those of us who favor it. Intellectual freedom. It just happens that Zionism, Israel, and the Holocaust Industry all stand foursquare against intellectual freedom with regard to the H. question, and a few other matters.

“Sooner or later even the Arabs were bound to get into the fray – in fact one wonders where the hell they‘ve been for the last fifty years. Of course, intellectual freedom is a rare commodity in the couple relatively free Arab states and nonexistent in the rest, so it‘s no wonder they‘re behind the curve on this issue, as they are on so many others. If it is ‘anti-Zionist and anti-Israel‘ to encourage intellectual freedom among Arabs, then Zionism and the Israeli State are regressive entities.”

And now this is just in from New Trend Magazine, published in Pennsylvania. Its publisher is Kaukab Siddique, an associate professor of English at Lincoln University in Pennsylvania. New Trend states that it is against racism, classism, gender superiority, Zionism and Imperialism.

“The Qur'an and the authentic Hadith are our foundation.” In the January 28th issue of New Trend, Siddique outlines the six primary reasons why the Auschwitz story is difficult to believe, then he goes on to ask:

“How do we know that the holocaust stories are grossly exaggerated and in some cases fabricated? There are numerous scholars known as revisionists who have proven that the Jews did suffer a lot, as did the Germans and the Russians, but there was no special suffering of the Jews.

“With the writings of the revisionists, with a whole team of writers with Bradley Smith [Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust, CODOH] and the brilliant work of Mark Weber, David Irving, Germar Rudolf, Rassinier, Faurisson and many others, the holocaust story is in serious trouble. The only way Israel can continue to collect funds owing to the ‘victim‘ status of the Jews is by making sure that the revisionists are kept STRICTLY out of the mass media.”

*** It was this last New Year‘s Eve and I was in the bedroom alone watching Russell Crowe in Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World. I just happened onto it. My wife wants me in the front room to watch The Titanic with her, it is New Year‘s Eve after all, but I‘m caught up with the Crowe story and the detailed production values picturing life aboard a frigate two hundred years ago. Production values are very high. The story line has to do with a British ship commander during the war with Napoleon who has been directed to capture or destroy a French privateer which is currently in the Atlantic off South America and headed toward the Pacific. The French ship turns out to be bigger and faster than Crowe‘s ship, and to be captained by a first-class officer. It‘s an almost impossible task. I am caught up with the idea of Crowe‘s single-mindedness in accomplishing a very difficult, specific goal.

Somewhere toward the end of the movie, disgusted by the very well choreographed brutal battle scenes of hand-to-hand combat as the British storm the French ship, the brain becomes aware that, unlike the Crowe character, I am not goal-oriented. I do not have one great goal that I have set myself. It is the nature of my character to be oriented toward process, rather than goal.

And that brings to the brain the fact that I wrote something to that effect in the preface to Confessions of a Holocaust Revisionist in the 1980s. I look for it, and there it is. “I‘ve been writing for 35 years, unsuccessfully. I don‘t seem to have minded, an example perhaps of ambition flawed beyond repair, an excessive enjoyment with process.” I wrote that in 1987, twenty-five years ago! And here I am today, staying with process, having no specific, great, overriding goal or ambition. Maybe it‘s time for me to look at this question of “process.” Process lives on time. Time for me is becoming an existential issue. How much is there? In the day? In the rest of it?

*** Carlos Porter sent me these lines by Heinrich Heine. He remarks that “Heine was a German Jewish poet and socialist who hated the Germans, went into exile and spent most of his life in France; but this is what he felt compelled to say about the Germans!”

Heinrich Heine, Über den Denunzianten, 1837 (Translation by Carlos Porter)

"The greatest virtue of the Germans is a certain loyalty, a certain, thick-headed, but movingly generous loyalty. The German fights for the worst causes, once he has taken the ‘King‘s shilling’, or whenever he has promised his support in a moment of enthusiasm; he fights with a breaking heart, but he fights; no matter how much his better conviction may demur, he cannot simply desert the banner, and he is least likely of all to do so when his party is in danger or perhaps surrounded by superior numbers of enemy…

"There is also a certain shame in the nature of the Germans; they will never draw their sword against a weaker adversary, and they will never touch an enemy who has been brought down, until that same enemy loosens his bonds and is free to fight once again…

"The Germans are the bravest people. Other people fight well, too, but their fighting spirit is always supported by accessory motives. The French fight well whenever they have a big audience, or whenever it's a question of any of their pet hobby-horses, for example, Liberty and Equality, Glory and the like…

"But the Germans are brave without second thoughts, they fight just to fight, just as they drink just to drink. The German soldier is not driven into battle by vanity, or desire for glory, or an unawareness of the danger that awaits him in battle; he stands calmly in line and does his duty; cold, unafraid, reliable."

*** In Afghanistan four U.S. Marines urinate on three dead Taliban fighters and arrange to have moving pictures taken of the event. Once the film appears on YouTube for the entire world to see, persons representing the U.S. government-media complex expressed outrage over the film and denounced it as despicable. I do not feel worked up over the footage. If those four marines were willing to fly 7,000 – 8,000 miles (we have a “volunteer” military) at the behest of their government to kill three Afghans they did not know, most likely had never seen before, not bothering to take into consideration their families, sisters and brothers, but killed them because they got in the way (we are not told the specifics of the original encounter), I see their pissing on the corpses as an insignificant vulgarity.

The brain recalls a sunny noonday in a forest on a mountainside in Korea more than half a century ago (that‘s how the brain works). There were some Chinese machine gunners a hundred yards up the ridgeline above us and we had fallen out for the moment to take stock of the situation. I was the company runner for Captain Grey so I was usually near him. That noonday we were sitting near a fallen tree.

All was quiet for the moment and then one of the guys near Captain Grey and me said: “Look at that.”

Turns out our own machine gunner, Tennessee, had chosen to fall out near a dead Chinese infantryman. None of the rest of us had seen him in the undergrowth. When I looked over it was not clear at first, then it was clear. Tennessee was using a pocket knife to saw off one of the fingers of the Chinese. Why? The finger had a ring on it. A souvenir. Problem was, it wasn‘t easy. There were little ribbons of bloody flesh on his hands, but the bone was difficult and he had to work at it.

I looked at Captain Grey and he was watching Tennessee. I said something softly about how maybe we should say something. Captain Grey, not taking his eyes off Tennessee, did not respond. He shook his head slowly from side to side. He didn‘t approve, that was clear, but he wasn‘t going to make a scene among his own men that noonday over the despicable desecration of a Chinese corpse. In 1950 when the Korean campaign began I was with the military police at Carlisle Barracks in Pennsylvania, not the infantry. Turned out I was the only soldier at Carlisle Barracks who volunteered to go to Korea as a rifleman. My volunteering was not an act of patriotism to serve my country, but an eager search for dangerous diversion. I volunteered to fly 7,000 miles and do whatever I was told to do. Pretty much like the four marines in the recent video.

Pissing on a corpse? Poor form, sure, but what‘s that compared to volunteering to fly to Afghanistan—or Korea—or most any other place else in the world to kill guys who are pretty much like you? The mothers, fathers, brothers and sisters and cultural norms regarding killing strangers pretty much like your own?

*** Mark Levin has published a new book he calls Ameritopia. It‘s just out, I haven‘t read it, but Levin is pitching it professionally on his radio show. It treats with the struggle between liberty and the risk of failure on the one hand, and on the other guaranteed security provided by a huge bureaucratic apparatus that‘s been growing in the U.S. over the last century, now elaborately represented by the Obama regime. The other night I listened on the car radio while Levin talked about how he is not running for political office, is not a behind-the-scenes mover and shaker, not a billionaire, but a simple writer whose work is to “get the message out.” What‘s that?

Get the message out? And there is was. This last New Year‘s Eve the brain, as if it resided in the head of a teenager, had vexed itself by comparing process with goal. As if the two were not one. There is no whole without halves. That‘s what I‘m doing, what this work is about. There is no Russell Crowe, no Master and Commander here, but a simple writer working to get the message out.

As if to support this observation, Hernandez has just sent me some stats for 2011. There were 381,883 unique visitors who signed into CODOH.com and the CODOH Forum. That‘s just CODOH.

On the Internet Holocaust revisionism is referenced 661,000 times and the top Website to be referenced there is CODOH.com. That‘s us.

Holocaust denial is referenced 1,540,000 times.

When I Google “Holocaust Denial in the Muslim World” I get 2,150,000 references!

Gas chambers 4,150,000 times.

Auschwitz, 24,600,000 references. I remember, before the Internet, remarking on the spectacular fact that there were almost 2,000,000 references to Auschwitz in the literature. The message is getting out. CODOH is playing a primary role in getting it out. We‘re doing just fine, and with a little right thinking and a little luck, we‘re going to get it out even better than we have been getting it out. You‘ll read all about it right here.

*** “Joint Chiefs Pledge End to Policy of Urinating on the Dead” by Frank Scott.

“Military leaders from all branches of the service expressed support for continued mass murders according to accepted civilized rules of war but promised that American military personnel would no longer be allowed to urinate on people after they had killed them.

“If some angry soldier pisses on an enemy while that enemy is still alive, that will be okay but we will not tolerate degrading the dead by such disrespectfulness” said Joint Chief spokesperson Admiral General Flight Commander Hillary Eunice Chan von Santos.”

[Forgive me. I couldn’t resist. You can find Frank Scott at: http://legalienate.-blogspot.com ]

Until next month then.

Bradley